„Zoophilologica. Polish Journal of Animal Studies” FILOZOFIA Nr 1/2015 Zwierzęce issn 2451-3849 Donald Wesling University of California Placing the Work of Timothy Morton Within Material Ecocriticism Timothy Morton has some excellent remarks in passing on the relationship of humans and animals in his two books from Harvard University Press (2007, 2010), amounting in total to about two dozen pages, and I will survey those in a moment. Morton’s two more recent books (both 2013) show him coming forward as an object-oriented ontologist, with the sole focus of his attention on nonhuman objects and not nonhuman beings1. The value of his writings for animal studies, concern of this journal, is to call forth a preliminary map- ping of networks of affiliation within material ecocriticism, including animals on one side of my attached diagram; and to notice in Morton a strong cri- tique of ecological theory from within, along with proposals for an ecology- 1 Timothy Morton is British by birth, and trained as a scholar of Romanticism, a literary-his- torical era where one main organizing idea is the concept of nature. He has taught at the Univer- sity of California, Davis, and now teaches at Rice University, Houston, Texas. My report is based on the four books as noted, and on two essays in anthologies published in 2014. Books: Without Nature: Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics (Harvard UP, 2007); The Ecological Thought (Harvard UP, 2010); Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World (University of Minne- sota Press, 2013); Realist Magic: Objects, Ontology, Causality (Open Humanities Press, An imprint of MPublishing, University of Michigan Library, Ann Arbor, 2013). Articles: “The Liminal Space between Things: Epiphany and the Physical”. In: Material Ecocriticism. Ed. Serinella Iovino, Ser- pil Oppermann (Indiana UP, 2014); “Deconstruction and/as Ecology”. In: The Oxford Handbook of Ecocriticism. Ed. G. Garrard (Oxford UP, 2014). The diagram attached to this report is also a record of interpretive reading, but I leave to others the job of verifying whether my placement of names and of arrows between names is accurate. The third paragraph below will help in this endeavor. Especially on the animals side of the diagram, other names might be added. 62 Donald Wesling -to-come. For myself, I consider Morton (after non-literary Bruno Latour) the most brilliant of the theorists and stylists of the larger field. However I would like, at the end, to raise questions about recent definitions of eco-writing that come from him and from others, like Serinella Iovino, the writer and antholo- gist, who sponsor him. Morton has written earlier books, but if we keep our attention only on the programmatic eco-studies, he began in 2007 in the middle of the dia- gram, with lively awareness of recent debates in animal studies, and has now moved to the other side as a member of the object-oriented school. Strong hints of his fascination with nonhuman objects were there in the two Harvard books. So he has a place, unusually, across all three horizontal categories of the dia- gram. I take this as a sign of his range, his ability to adapt, not of his frivolity. (However: we shall see that while he is always consciously a literary person doing something like philosophy, always on point and eloquent, nonetheless he is very willing to hook the reader by a repertoire of flashy effects). From the evidence of passages I will quote and summarize below, I want to claim that there is no one like him on the more traditional, intensely moral and even dour ani- mal side of the grid. (Should more of us be sparking ideas and writing specu- latively, even excessively, like him?). Also the questions that come from reading him are questions for animal studies too. A word on the following diagram. Reading top to bottom, clearly the major influence on this generation’s scholarly writing on eco-topics is Bruno Latour’s repeated and forceful insistence that nonhuman animals and objects insert them- selves (note the ascription of agency) into all our knowledge of reality; and his account of action-networks, which Latour said provide connections, but no struc- ture: networks have no inside, only radiating lines of linkage. Along with the edi- tors and the many writers in both 2014 eco-anthologies listed in Note 1, Morton in his books explicitly cites Latour as the origin, so we place Latour in the center and write his name largest. Deleuze, Whitehead, and Lingis are eccentric, outside the most traveled arrows of transmission, but powerful for those who refer to them. Martin Heidegger on tools was a leading thinker for Graham Harman as he was developing object-oriented ontology in two early books, but mostly as a figure to contend with. On the left or animal side, Heidegger’s much-cited 1930 assertion that animals are “poor in world” was one source of Jacques Derri- da’s philosophical anger, which resulted in field-foundational theses on animal- ist perception in The Animal That Therefore I Am and in Derrida’s late lectures published as Beast and Sovereign. Reading from left to right, I do not find many responses to Latour on the animal studies side, and rightly so, because Latour has never given much thought to the nonhumans that are animals. But the links between him and general-topic eco-critics in the middle and the object- philosophers on the right are multiple and very direct: for example Harman has written a book on Latour, Prince of Networks, and another book, The Wolf Placing the Work of Timothy Morton… 63 and the Prince, records a Latour-Harman public dialogue at the London School of Economics 2. (on animals as “poor in world”) Networks of Affiliation within Material Ecocriticism (Animals to the Left, Objects to the Right) Jacques Derrida Gilles Deleuze Michel Serres Martin Heidegger (on Tools) Alfred North Whitehead Bruno Latour Isabelle Stengers Animal Studies Eco-Critics (favoring the non-human) Object Oriented Ontology Graham Harman Donna Haraway Donna Haraway Timothy Morton Timothy Morton Ian Bogost Kari Weil Serinella Iovino (IU Press anthology) Cary Wolfe Greg Garrard (OUP Press anthology) Brian Massumi Alfonso Lingis Timothy Morton Figure 1. Networks of Affiliation within Material Ecocriticism * In Without Nature and The Ecological Thought, Morton returns frequently to the human-animal relation. Rarely does he dwell for longer than a sentence, 2 G. Harman: Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. Melbourne, 2009; B. Latour, G. Harman, P. Erdélyi: The Wolf and the Prince: Latour and Harman at the LSE. Winchester, UK and Washington, USA, 2011. 64 Donald Wesling paragraph, or page on the animals topic, but always he is decisive, memorable, sassy, and alert to all recent counter-currents of argument. Here in 2007 and 2010, as in his more recent books on hyperobjects, he intends to challenge conven- tional thinking, make huge the scale of the reader’s imagining, and ultimately to redefine the entire relationship of science to the humanities, because of global warming. Climate change, the change that changes everything, is the cynosure of threat among all Morton’s hyperobjects. These two books from Harvard are part of a single plan to call in question a naive or mimetic (his term) existing environmental aesthetics. In Without Nature he scorns “the ersatz primitivism of ecological writing in general” (133). In Ecological Thought he imagines different types and scales of interconnect- edness, and here starts a new synonym for this, the mesh, for frequent use: we humans are in the mesh with the cosmos, pollution, ebola, microorganisms on our eyelashes, in scales of nano and hyper, along with objects on a scale “vast yet intimate” (15). His question now will be: Why stop there?, and his typical stance will be: “Loving the strange stranger [animals being one main instance] has an excessive, unquantifiable, nonlinear, ‘queer’ quality” (79). Morton’s pas- sages on animals occur as illustrations, problem-points, within these frames of the larger argument. Here is Morton on animals as possible persons as he sets up his argument in Without Nature: “Chapter 3 demonstrates that the ‘Aeolean,’ ambient poet- ics outlined in Chapter 1–picking up the vibrations of a material universe and recording them with high fidelity—inevitably ignores the subject, and thus cannot fully come to terms with an ecology that may manifest itself in beings who are also persons—including, perhaps, those other beings we designate as ani- mals” (4). Co-existence, co-everything, is one of his major themes as he obses- sively works to define an ecology-to-come: “The idea of the environment is… a way of considering groups and collectives—humans surrounded by nature, or in continuity with other beings such as animals and plants. It is about being-with” (17). Morton at several points in this 2007 book develops a critique of the views of David Abram, a nature-writer in the phenomenological line of Merleau-Ponty, as “inverted speciesism” (99), namely wanting to forget about the differences between humans and animals. Against Abram he develops his own ideas of the strange stranger and the necessary irony of ecological thinking: “Animals bring up the ways in which humans develop intolerances to strange- ness and the stranger […]. The only way to remain close to the strangers with- out killing them […] [Morton refers here to Nazis who hated animal cruelty but murdered threatening human beings] is to maintain a sense of irony. If irony and movement are not part of environmentalism, strangers are in danger of dis- appearing, exclusion, ostracism, or worse” (99, 100). Further: “There is something aporetic in our uncertainty as to whether animals are human or not” (187).